Electrochemical Porosity Measurement of Electroless
Nickel Coatings on Ferrous Substrates
Information resulting from AESF Research Project
By L. Das, D-T. Chin, G.L. Evarts & R.L. Zeller III
A non-destructive electrochemical method is used to mea-
sure the porosity of electroless nickel (EN) coatings on
steel and gray cast iron. The method is based on determin-
ing the mixed potential of a duplex metal surface consist-
ing of an EN coating and the ferrous substrate exposed by
the pores in a corrosive electrolyte; the measured poros-
ity is quantitatively expressed in terms of the fraction of
pore area on the coating surface. The accuracy of this
method is compared to the conventional ferroxyl and salt
fog spray tests. The electrochemical technique is found to
be more sensitive than the ferroxyl test, and provides the
porosity information comparable to that of the salt fog
test in a much shorter time without destroying the ap-
pearance of test samples. The electrochemical porosity
measurement is subsequently used to examine the effect
of substrate preparation, including surface polishing and
an electrolytic nickel strike, on the porosity of EN coating
on carbon steel and gray cast iron substrates. It is found
that the porosity of EN coatings decrease with decreasing
roughness of the substrate surface. Mechanically polish-
ing the substrates to 1-µm smoothness prior to EN plating
eliminates nodular EN deposits and reduces the porosity
of the EN coating. Electropolishing of the substrate sur-
face also results in EN deposits with low porosity. An
electrolytic nickel strike on carbon steel and gray cast
iron prior to EN plating decreases the porosity of the EN
coating by covering exposed graphite and other non-
catalytic inclusions on the substrate surface with a cata-
lytic nickel layer. The porosity of an EN coating decreases
with increasing thickness of the nickel strike. A nickel
strike of 1 µm in thickness virtually eliminates nodular
EN deposits and reduces the coating porosity by a factor
of 100 to an area fraction of pores less than 10-5.
Electroless nickel (EN) coatings are used in engineering
applications to provide protection to ferrous alloys exposed
to corrosive environments.1 Electroless nickel coating on a
ferrous substrate is an example of a more noble coating on a
less noble substrate. If the less noble substrate is exposed to
a corrosive environment through pores and discontinuities in
the coating, corrosion of the substrate leading to failure of the
coating would take place. For EN coatings to function satis-
factorily as a corrosion barrier, it is necessary to be free of
pores.
The porosity of EN coatings is usually measured using the
ferroxyl test or the salt fog test.2 Although these methods are
useful for detecting pores in the deposit, their test results are
not always reproducible. The salt fog test is destructive to the
coating and requires 24 to 48 hr to complete. The purpose of
this study is to develop a fast and non-destructive method to
measure the porosity of EN coatings on ferrous substrates.
The method is based on an electrochemical principle of
measuring the mixed potential of a duplex metal surface
consisting of the EN coating and the ferrous substrate ex-
66
posed by the pores to a corrosive electrolyte. The method
needs only a few minutes to complete a test, and the measured
porosity may be quantitatively expressed in terms of the
fraction of pore area on the coating surface.
In the current study, the electrochemical porosity measure-
ment is further used to examine the effect of substrate
preparation, including the surface polishing and electrolytic
nickel strike, on the porosity of EN coatings on ferrous alloys.
The morphology of the substrate prior to plating is a key
factor controlling the porosity of EN coatings. The studies by
Coussement et al.3 and Deng and Møller 4 indicated that
surface roughness of steel substrate had important conse-
quences on the EN deposit. They found that the corrosion
resistance of EN deposits decreased with increase in surface
roughness of the substrate prior to plating. A study by Kudrak
et al.5 also indicated that the porosity of palladium and gold
coatings increased with increasing roughness of the substrate
surface.
The corrosion resistance of EN is also affected by the
formation of nodular deposits. A study by Jones6 has shown
that the corrosion resistance of nodular hard chromium de-
posits may be improved by decreasing nodule size or elimi-
nating the nodules. Substrate defects, such as inclusions and
debris on the surface, are the main cause of the formation of
nodules and pores in EN deposits. A previous publication by
the authors7 revealed that non-catalytic graphite present in
the microstructure of ferrous alloys was responsible for the
formation of pores in EN deposits. Electroless nickel deposits
on nickel substrates, on the other hand, are nodule-free.
Nickel is catalytic to EN deposition and the EN coating
initiates and grows uniformly over the entire substrate sur-
face. Accordingly, a thin nickel strike to cover graphite and
other passive inclusions in ferrous substrates prior to EN
plating may potentially reduce the probability of pore forma-
tion on EN coatings. The current study was undertaken to
examine the effect of substrate surface polishing and electro-
lytic nickel strike on the porosity of EN coatings using the
electrochemical porosity measurement.
Experimental Procedure
Substrates and Surface Preparation Prior to EN
Plating
Three different ferrous substrates were used: (1) AISI 1010
carbon steel containing 0.1 percent carbon; (2) AISI 1075
carbon steel containing 0.75 percent carbon; and (3) a gray
cast iron containing 3 percent carbon and 2.7 percent silicon.
To examine the effect of substrate polishing on the poros-
ity of EN deposits, five different types of surface finishes
were prepared for the AISI 1010 carbon steel and gray cast
iron coupons. They were: (1) as received from a commercial
metal sample supplier; (2) polished with 120-grit silicon
carbide paper; (3) polished with 600-grit silicon carbide
paper; (4) polished with 1-µm alumina paste; and (5)
electropolished. Electropolishing of the carbon steel was
PLATING & SURFACE FINISHING
carried out in an electrolyte composed of 75 percent by
volume of phosphoric acid (85 wt percent in concentration)
and 25 percent by volume of lactic acid (85 wt percent in
concentration) at 25 A/dm2 and 60 o C for 30 min.8
Electropolishing of the gray cast iron was performed in a
solution containing 94 percent by volume of glacial acetic
acid and 6 percent by volume of perchloric acid (60 wt
percent in concentration) at 0 oC and a cell voltage of 40 V for
a period of 5 min.8
A nickel strike on some carbon steel and cast iron coupons
prior to EN plating was carried out with a Wood’s bath
composed of 240 g/L of nickel chloride and 384 g/L of
hydrochloric acid. The substrates were mechanically pol-
ished to a 600-grit surface finish prior to the strike. Platinum
was used as the anode and a cathodic current density of 6 A/
dm2 was maintained during the strike. The strike was carried
out for 2, 5 and 10 min to yield nickel coatings of different
thickness.
EN Coatings for Porosity Measurement
Two types of EN coatings were used. The first EN coating
(89.5% Ni, 10.5% P) was prepared using a commercial bath.
To prepare the samples for porosity measurements, AISI
1010 carbon steel coupons were soaked in a commercial
cleaning solution, electrocleaned with periodic reverse cur-
rent, activated by acid dip in 37-percent HCl, and immersed
in the commercial EN bath. The substrates were then plated
for various lengths of time to yield EN coating thicknesses of
0.4 to 64 µm. These samples were tested for porosity using
the electrochemical technique as well as with conventional
ferroxyl and salt fog tests.
The second type of EN coating (90.3% Ni, 9.7% P) was
prepared by dipping the ferrous substrates in a generic EN
bath containing 44 g/L nickel sulfate hexahydrate, 10 g/L
sodium hypophosphite hydrate, 42 g/L aminoacetic acid and
10 g/L acetic acid at 88 oC and pH 4.5. The ferrous coupons
were polished to various degrees of roughness. They were
anodically electrocleaned in 1 M NaOH at 5 A/dm2 for 2-3
min and were activated by dipping in 37-percent HCl for 1
min. The EN plating was carried out in the generic bath for
different time intervals to produce coating thicknesses rang-
ing from 2 to 35 µm. The morphology of the EN-coated
samples was observed under a scanning electron microscope
(SEM), and the coating porosity was measured using the
electrochemical technique.
Electrochemical Porosity Measurement
The principle of the electrochemical porosity measurements
is based on the fact that a duplex metal surface (part coating
and part substrate exposed through pores in the coating)
exhibits a corrosion potential on exposure to a corroding
electrolyte. The value of the corrosion potential depends on
the area fraction of pores and the polarization of the anode
(base metal) and cathode (coating). An equation by Mansfeld9
for the corrosion potential Ecorr of a galvanic couple where the
anodic area is much smaller than the cathodic area may be
given as:
Ecorr = k - [b abc/(ba + bc)] log (θA)
where θA is the area fraction of the anode (or porosity); ba is
the Tafel slope for the anodic reaction; bc is the Tafel slope for
the cathodic reaction; and k is a constant. This equation
indicates that a plot of the corrosion potential vs. log θA would
yield a straight line. Electroless nickel on ferrous substrate is
July 1997
an example of a noble coating on an active metal with low
porosity. In a corrosive electrolyte, the anodic area is the
ferrous substrate exposed through the pores and the cathodic
area is the EN coating. Accordingly, the above principle for
porosity measurement is applicable. If a calibration plot in
the form of area fraction of exposed iron vs. corrosion
potential is available, the porosity of an EN coating on a
ferrous substrate may be determined from the calibration plot
by measuring the corrosion potential of the EN-coated sample.
In this study, a galvanically connected EN-iron couple was
used to calibrate the change in corrosion potential as a
function of the area fraction of iron. Because the galvanic
corrosion potential depends on the type and composition of
the EN deposit, two different EN sheets were used for the
calibration. The first was prepared by depositing 67.5 µm of
high-phosphorus EN (89.5 wt % Ni, 10.5 wt % P) on a large
nickel sheet, 64 cm2 in surface area, from the commercial EN
bath, while the second was prepared by depositing 30 µm of
EN (90.3 wt % Ni, 9.7 wt % P) on another nickel sheet of the
same surface area from the generic EN bath. An iron wire
(0.25 mm in dia.), insulated with wax except at the tip, was
galvanically connected to the EN-plated nickel sheet. The
area ratio of the iron wire to EN coating was varied by
changing the length of the exposed iron tip. The corrosion
potential of this EN-iron couple was measured in a solution
containing 3 wt percent NaCl and 1.5 wt percent H2O2 at 23
o
C , as described by Shome and Evans.10 A saturated calomel
electrode (SCE) was used as the reference, and the corrosion
potential of the EN-iron couple was measured with a high
input impedance electrometer.a The results of the calibration
are shown in Fig. 1. It was noted that the calibration lines for
the commercial and generic EN have a different slope and
intercept. Because the phosphorus content in the two coatings
was nearly the same, this suggests that additives used in the
commercial bath significantly modified the electrochemical
properties of the EN deposit.
To measure the porosity of a ferrous substrate coated with
EN, the sample was immersed in the same electrolyte at 23 oC
and its corrosion potential measured with reference to the
SCE. The area fraction of pores corresponding to the mea-
sured corrosion potential was then determined from the
calibration plot.
Ferroxyl Test
The porosity measurement using the ferroxyl test was carried
out in accordance with ASTM B733 (1994). The test solution
Porosity, area fraction (x 103)
Corrosion potential, V (vs. SCE)
Fig. 1—Calibration plot for area fraction of pores on EN coating vs.
corrosion potential of EN-coated ferrous substrate.
67
 with 2.1 µm of EN deposited; it
Table 1 was unable to detect pores in
Comparison of Electrochemical Porosity Measurement thicker coatings. The salt fog
With Results of Ferroxyl & Salt Fog Tests tests, on the other hand, were
successful in detecting pores
on all the samples, shown by
Porosity the presence of rust spots on the
sample surface. The number of
EN Deposit Ferroxyl Salt Fog Electrochemical Estimated pores decreased with increas-
Thickness Test Test Test Pore Size* ing in coating thickness, as
:m (no. of pores on (no. of pores on (area fraction (µm) shown in Table 1. The electro-
8 cm2 sample 8 cm2 sample of pores) chemical tests were capable of
area) area) measuring the area fraction of
0.42 - - 2.0 x 10-3 - pores on EN coatings.
The porosity of the commer-
cial EN coating was plotted
1.05 - - 1.9 x 10-3 - against deposit thickness in Fig.
2. The results obtained with salt
-3
fog tests agreed with the results
2.1 11 156 1.4 x 10 96 of electrochemical porosity
measurements. The porosity of
6.4 0 61 1.3 x 10 -3
147 EN on steel decreased with in-
crease in deposit thickness in
the range of 0-30 µm, beyond
26 0 3 0.93 x 10-3 560 which the porosity remained
approximately constant. The
electrochemical technique
38 0 5 0.97 x 10-3 440 gives results comparable to
those of the salt fog tests and
-3 requires a much shorter time
51 0 2 0.95 x 10 700
without destroying the sample.
The salt fog test and electro-
64 0 1 0.94 x 10 -3
980 chemical porosity measurement
data can be combined to esti-
* Estimated from the results in Columns 3 and 4, using the formula: mate the average pore size
4 (area fraction of pores) (sample area) present on the EN coating. The
Average pore diameter=
π number of pores estimated results are listed in
the last column of Table 1. It is
was prepared by dissolving 25 g potassium ferricyanide and noted that the average pore size
15 g sodium chloride in 1 L of distilled water. The test increases in a linear fashion with an increase in coating
samples were cleaned and immersed in the test solution for 30 thickness. This suggests that during the EN deposition pro-
o
sec at 25 C. The samples were then rinsed in water, dried in cess, small pores were being filled with EN, with only large
air, and examined for blue ferrous ferricyanide formed at the pores expected after a thick EN coating was deposited.
pore sites. The porosity of EN coatings on AISI 1010 and 1075 carbon
steel, prepared from the generic EN bath, is shown in Fig. 3.
Salt Fog Test The porosity of EN coatings on both substrates decreased
The salt fog test was carried out in accordance with ASTM with increasing deposit thickness. The porosity was slightly
B117 (1994). The EN-coated specimens were cleaned and lower on AISI 1010 steel than on AISI 1075 steel when
exposed in a salt spray chamber for 24 hr. The salt solution coating thickness was less than 10 µm. This may be a result
was 5-percent sodium chloride in distilled water. The tem- of the fact that AISI 1075 steel contains more carbon in its
perature in the salt spray chamber was maintained at 35 oC. microstructure than AISI 1010 steel.
After exposure, the test samples were rinsed in water to
remove salt deposits, dried and examined for rust spots on the Substrate Surface Roughness & Porosity of EN
surface. Coating
The effect of substrate roughness on EN porosity was tested
Results and Discussion with AISI 1010 carbon steel and gray cast iron coupons. They
Comparison of Ferroxyl, Salt Fog, & were polished to various roughnesses and coated with EN in
Electrochemical Porosity Measurements the generic bath to a common thickness of 12 ±0.7 µm.
Table 1 summarizes the results of the ferroxyl, salt fog, and Coating porosity was then measured with the electrochemi-
electrochemical porosity measurements for various thick- cal technique. Table 2 lists the porosity of generic EN
nesses of the commercial EN coating. With ferroxyl tests, coatings on the carbon steel and gray cast iron with different
blue spots appeared at the location of pores. The ferroxyl test surface roughness. For AISI 1010 carbon steel, the porosity
showed positive identification of pores only on the substrate of EN coatings on the as-received substrate surface and on the

68 PLATING & SURFACE FINISHING

 Table 2

Porosity, area fraction (x 103)

Effect of Substrate Roughness on Porosity
of Generic EN Deposit

Type of Substrate Porosity (Area Fraction of Pores)

Surface Finish

AISI 1010 Steel Gray Cast Iron

Blast with glass 3.5 x 10-3 -

beads (as received)

120-grit 3.2 x 10-3 4.0 x 10-3

Deposit thickness, µm 400-grit - 2.3 x 10-3

600-grit 1.2 x 10-3 1.4 x 10-3

1-µm alumina 0.67 x 10-3 1.3 x 10-3

paste

0.75 x 10-3 0.9 x 10-3

Number of pores

Electrochemical
polish

Porosity, area fraction (x 103)

Deposit thickness, µm
Fig. 2— Porosity of commercial EN coating on AISI 1010 carbon steel as
function of coating thickness: (a) results of electrochemical measurement;
(b) results of salt fog test.

120-grit finish were higher than that on the 600-grit surface

finish. The porosity of EN coating on the substrates polished
with 1-µm alumina paste and electropolishing was the low-
est. For the gray cast iron substrates, the porosity was reduced
by half when the surface roughness decreased from 120-grit
to a 600-grit finish prior to EN plating. Mechanical polishing
to 1 µm in smoothness and electropolishing further reduced
the porosity.
Figure 4 is a SEM photomicrograph showing the morphol-
ogy of EN deposit on the as-received surface of an AISI 1010
carbon steel coupon. Figure 5 is a SEM photomicrograph of
EN deposit on a carbon steel coupon polished to 1 µm
smoothness prior to EN plating. The inset in each photomi-
crograph shows the substrate surface prior to EN deposition.
The EN on the as-received steel coupon was nodular in
structure. The size of nodules was found to decrease with
decreasing surface roughness and, when the substrate surface
was polished to 1 µm in smoothness, the EN deposit became
free of nodules, as shown in Fig. 5. Small nodules were
observed on the EN deposit on the electropolished steel
surface. The electropolished steel surface was passive to EN
deposition and had to be activated by etching in 37-percent
HCl for a longer period of time. The etching in HCl may have
destroyed the surface smoothness and caused the formation
of small nodules and a slight increase in the porosity of the EN
Thickness of EN deposit, µm
Fig. 3—Porosity of generic EN coating on AISI 1010 and 1075 carbon
steel as function of coating thickness by electrochemical technique.
coating on electropolished AISI 1010 carbon steel, as shown
in Table 2.
The SEM examination of EN coatings on gray cast iron
coupons with different surface finishes (120-grit, 400-grit,
600-grit, 1µm, and electropolish) revealed the presence of
nodular deposits on all the samples. The nodules were ob-
served along the grinding marks on the coupons with 120-
grit, 400-grit and 600-grit finish. When the gray cast iron was
polished to 1 µm in smoothness, the graphite flakes present
in the microstructure showed up on the surface as shown in
Fig. 6a. Figure 6b shows that the nodular EN deposit was
formed on the graphite inclusion, whereas the EN deposit on
the surrounding iron portion of the substrate was free of
nodules.
Effect of Nickel Strike on the Porosity of EN
Deposits
The results in the previous section show that surface rough-

July 1997 71
 Table 3
Effect of Electrolytic Nickel Strike Prior to
Plating on Porosity of Generic EN Deposit
On Carbon Steel & Gray Cast Iron

Substrate Nickel Strike Nickel Porosity

Time Strike (Area Fraction
(min) Thickness of Pores)
(µm)

ISI 1010 0 0 1.2x10-3

Carbon Steel

2 0.25 0.47x10-3
Fig. 5—SEM photomicrograph of generic EN deposit (12 µm thick) on an
-5 AISI 1010 carbon steel coupon; surface mechanically polished to 1 µm
5 0.46 < 10 smoothness (inset) prior to EN plating.

Gray Cast Iron 0 0 1.4x10-3

(a) (b)
-3
2 0.22 1.7x10

5 0.45 0.9x10-3

10 0.97 < 10-5

Fig. 6—SEM photomicrograph of gray cast iron coupon polished to 1 µm

smoothness: (a) before EN plating; (b) after coating with 12 µm generic
EN.

(a) (b)

Fig. 4—SEM photomicrograph of generic EN deposit (12 µm thick) on the

as-received surface (without any polishing) of an AISI 1010 carbon steel
coupon. The inset shows the surface prior to EN plating.

ness of the substrate affects the porosity of the EN deposit.

The presence of graphite flakes on gray cast iron surfaces also
results in nodular EN deposits with an increased porosity. One
way to reduce the porosity of EN coating on ferrous substrates
is to cover exposed graphite and other non-catalytic surface
inclusions with a thin layer of electrolytic nickel. Experi-
ments were carried out to determine the effectiveness of
electrolytic nickel strikes prior to EN plating in reducing the
porosity of EN deposit on AISI 1010 carbon steel and gray
cast iron coupons having a 600-grit surface finish. Figures 7a
and 8a show the surface of gray cast iron coupons after 2 min
(0.2 µm coating thickness) and 10 min (1 µm coating thick-
ness) nickel strike, respectively. Figures 7b and 8b are the
SEM photomicrographs of the same coupons coated with 12
±0.7 µm of EN. Two min of nickel strike was not long enough
Fig. 7—SEM photomicrograph of gray cast iron coupon pre-coated with
0.2 µm of an electrolytic nickel strike: (a) before EN plating; (b) after
coating with 12 µm generic EN.
to cover all the graphite flakes present on the surface of gray
cast iron. The EN deposit still exhibited a nodular structure,
as shown in Fig. 7b. Two min of nickel strike eliminated
nodular deposits on AISI 1010 carbon steel, however. When
the nickel strike time was increased to 10 min, all the graphite
flakes on gray cast iron were covered by the electrolytic
nickel coating, and the subsequent EN coating became free of
nodules, as seen in Fig. 8b.

72 PLATING & SURFACE FINISHING

 (a) (b)
Fig. 8—SEM photomicrograph of gray cast iron coupon pre-coated with 1
µm of an electrolytic nickel strike: (a) before EN plating; (b) after coating
with 12 µm generic EN.
The EN-coated carbon steel and gray cast iron coupons,
pre-coated with an electrolytic nickel strike, were tested for
porosity using the electrochemical porosity measurement.
Table 3 lists the porosity of EN deposits on the substrates with
different nickel-strike thickness. The porosity of EN on both
gray cast iron and steel substrates decreased with an increase
in the thickness of the nickel strike. Without a nickel strike,
the area fractions of pores of EN was on the order of 10-3.
When the thickness of the nickel strike was 1 µm, the porosity
of the EN coating on both AISI 1010 carbon steel and gray
cast iron was reduced to less than 10-5 (area fraction of pores).
Summary
1. The results of porosity measurements of EN coatings on
steel substrate using the electrochemical, conventional
ferroxyl and salt fog spray techniques indicate that the
electrochemical technique is a quick and quantitative
method for measuring EN porosity in the form of area
fractions of pores on the coating surface. The electro-
chemical method is more sensitive than the ferroxyl test,
and provides porosity information comparable to that
obtained with the salt fog spray test in a much shorter time
without destroying the appearance of test samples.
2. The porosity of EN coatings on carbon steel and gray cast
iron substrates decreases with decreasing roughness of
the substrate surface. Mechanically polishing the sub-
strates to 1 µm smoothness prior to EN plating eliminates
nodular EN deposits and reduces the porosity of the EN
coating. Electropolishing of the ferrous substrates also
results in EN deposits with a low porosity.
3. An electrolytic nickel strike on carbon steel and gray cast
iron prior to EN plating decreases the porosity of EN
coating by covering exposed graphite and other non-
catalytic inclusions on the substrate surface with a cata-
lytic nickel layer. The porosity of EN coatings decreases
with increasing thickness of a nickel strike. One µm of
nickel strike virtually eliminates nodular EN deposits and
reduces the coating porosity to less than 10-5 (area fraction
of pores).
a
Model 610C, Keithley Instruments, Cleveland, OH
Editor’s note: Although this article is not a formal,
required report, the work described here was supported by
AESF Research Project 90. This is an edited version of the
paper presented at AESF SUR/FIN® ’97.
July 1997
References
1. ASTM B 733-90, Standard Specification for Auto-cata-
lytic Nickel-Phosphorus Coatings on Metals, American
Society for Testing Materials, Philadelphia, PA, 1994.
2. ASTM B 117-94, Standard Practice for Operating Salt
Spray (Fog) Testing Apparatus, American Society for
Testing Materials, Philadelphia, PA, 1994.
3. M.J. Coussement, P. Jensen, J.R. Roos, J.P. Celis and M.
Neutjens, “Results of Research Work with NiSO4,” Elec-
troless Nickel Conf. IV (1985).
4. H. Deng, and P. Møller, Proc. AESF Annual Tech. Conf.,
Anaheim, CA, 979 (1993).
5. E.J. Kudrak, J.A. Abys and F. Humiec, ibid., 84, 32 (Jan.
1997).
6. A.R. Jones, Plat. and Surf. Fin., 81, 14 (Oct. 1994).
7. L. Das, D-T. Chin, R.L. Zeller, and G.L. Evarts, Plat.
and Surf. Fin., 82, 56 (Oct. 1995).
8. P. Dettner, in Electrolytic and Chemical Polishing of
Metals, Needer Press, Tel Aviv, 1988.
9. F. Mansfeld, Corrosion, 27, 436 (1971).
10. S.C. Shome and U.R. Evans, J. Electrodep. Tech. Soc.,
27, 65 (1951).
Das Chin Evarts Zeller
About the Authors
Dr. Leena Das is a member of the R&D staff at Frederick
Gumm Chemical Co., 538 Forest St., Kearny, NJ 07032. Her
research interests are electroless nickel and chloride zinc
plating. She received a B. Tech in chemical engineering from
the Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, and MS and
PhD in chemical engineering from Clarkson University.
Dr. Der-Tau Chin is professor of chemical engineering,
Clarkson University, Potsdam, NY 13699. He has more than
20 years’ research experience in electroplating, corrosion,
electrochemical energy conversion, and industrial electro-
lytic processes. Prior to joining Clarkson, he was a senior
research engineer in the Electrochemistry Department of
General Motors Research Laboratories. Dr. Chin received
his PhD from the University of Pennsylvania.
Gerald L. Evarts is a technical service engineer with
Occidental Chemical Corp. Tech Center in Niagara Falls,
NY. He has worked in the coatings industry for more than 27
years in various research and technical service positions. He
has published several papers and holds five patents in the
field of protective coating.
Dr. Robert L. Zeller III, P.E., is the technical team leader
for specialty chemicals at the Occidental Chemical Corp.
Niagara Plant. He holds a BS and an MS in chemical
engineering from the University of Akron and a PhD in
chemical engineering from Case Western Reserve Univer-
sity. He was recently recognized as a 1994 Inventor of the
Year for a patented process to produce hypophosphorous
acid by electrodialysis.
73